In re N.D. CA2/8
Filed 9/22/22 In re N.D. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
In re N.D. et al., Persons Coming B316361 Under Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN Los Angeles County AND FAMILY SERVICES, Super. Ct. No. 19CCJP05436A-B
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
M.D.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Steff R. Padilla, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed. Joseph T. Tavano, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Dawyn R. Harrison, Acting County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and Kelly Emling, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________
Father M.D. appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights to his children N.D. and K.D. Father’s sole claim of error is that the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) made an inadequate initial inquiry concerning the children’s ancestry for purposes of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA; 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). We affirm. BACKGROUND 1. Overview of Proceedings N.D. is now 18 years old. K.D. is now 17 years old. This dependency proceeding began three years ago, in 2019, when N.D. and K.D. were detained from their parents due to parents’ drug abuse and neglect of the children, who lived in a dangerously filthy and deplorably unsanitary home. Soon thereafter, the Department added allegations of domestic violence. The children were placed with N.D.’s high school music teacher and her husband. The parents failed to reunify with their children, and the court terminated reunification services in April 2021. The foster parents wanted to adopt both children, and both children told the court they wanted to be adopted. The court terminated parental rights in September 2021. 2. Facts Relevant to ICWA Inquiry Paternal grandmother lived in the squalid home with the family when the children were detained. In the detention report, the Department reported the children would be staying with paternal aunt while the parents cleaned the house. The petition reflects that the Department questioned father in person about K.D. and N.D.’s ancestry and he advised that neither has any known Indian ancestry. In August 2019, at the initial appearance hearing, both mother and father filed parental
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)